Briggs v. Shinn

6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

9 Troy Jack Briggs, No. CV-18-00031-TUC-SHR 10 Petitioner, ORDER v. Charles Ryan, et al., 13 Respondents.

15 On July 9, 2020, Magistrate Judge Erik J. Markovich issued a Report and Recommendation (“R&R”) in which he recommended the Court dismiss Petitioner Troy Jack Briggs’s Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (“Petition”).

18 (Doc. 22.) The R&R notified the parties they had fourteen (14) days from the date of the R&R to file any objections. No objections have been filed.

20 If neither party objects to a magistrate judge’s report and recommendation, the District Court is not required to review the magistrate judge’s decision under any specified standard of review. Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 150 (1985). However, the statute for review of a magistrate judge’s recommendation “does not preclude further review by the district judge, sua sponte or at the request of a party, under a de novo or any other standard.”

25 Thomas, 474 U.S. at 154.

26 The Court has reviewed the Petition (Doc. 1), the Respondent’s Answer (Doc. 12), Petitioner’s Reply (Doc. 18), and Judge Markovich’s R&R (Doc. 22). The Court finds the R&R well-reasoned and agrees with Judge Markovich’s conclusions. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b).

2 IT IS ORDERED the R&R is ADOPTED (Doc. 22) and Troy Jack Briggs’s 3|| Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 is DENIED and 4|| DISMISSED (Doc. 1). The Clerk of Court shall docket accordingly and close the case file || in this matter.

6 Dated this 21st day of August, 2020.

11 ( : Honorable Scott H. Rash _/ United States District Judge -2-